Maternal vaccination against pertussis as part of the national immunization program: a qualitative evaluation among obstetric care providers one year after the implementation in December 2019.

BACKGROUND: Immunization of pregnant women with a tetanus-diphtheria-and-acellular-pertussis (Tdap) vaccine is an effective and safe way to protect infants from pertussis before their primary vaccinations. Vaccine uptake among pregnant women is influenced by their care providers' attitudes toward maternal vaccination. This qualitative study aimed to evaluate the implementation of the maternal Tdap vaccination under the National Immunization Program of the Netherlands from the perspective of obstetric care providers. METHODS: In this qualitative and explorative study, we conducted in-depth interviews by telephone with obstetric care providers who were selected from a pool of respondents (convenience sampling) to a questionnaire in a previous study. The interviews were based on a semi-structured interview guide that covered three aspects of the implementation strategy: providers' overall experience with the implementation of maternal Tdap vaccination in the Netherlands; implementation logistics and counseling, and pregnant women referrals to municipal Youth Healthcare Centers. The interviews were recorded, pseudonymized and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analyzed according to the Thematic Analysis approach by two researchers independently in two phases of iterative coding, categorizing, reviewing and redefining until ultimately, emergent themes regarding maternal Tdap vaccination implementation were identified. RESULTS: Interviews with 11 midwives and 5 OB-GYN physicians yielded 5 major themes regarding the Tdap vaccination implementation strategy: challenges throughout the implementation process, views on maternal Tdap vaccination, general versus tailored counseling, provider responsibilities in vaccine promotion, and impact of materials for information delivery. Participants indicated that to improve provider attitudes toward Tdap vaccination, its implementation requires clear and transparent information about what is entailed, i.e., what is expected from obstetric care providers, how they can obtain information, and when their actions must be initiated. Participants demanded involvement throughout the implementation planning process. They preferred tailored communication with pregnant women over a generalized approach. CONCLUSION: This study emphasized the importance of involving all relevant healthcare professionals in planning the implementation of maternal Tdap vaccination. Possible barriers perceived by these professionals should be taken into account in order to improve their attitudes toward vaccination, thus to increase uptake among pregnant women.

Not a general, symptom-unspecific, transdiagnostic marker for functional symptoms: sensorimotor processing of head control is intact in chronic pain.

Introduction: Functional disorders are prevalent in all medical fields and pose a tremendous public health problem, with pain being one of the most common functional symptoms. Understanding the underlying, potentially unifying mechanism in functional (pain) disorders is instrumental in facilitating timely diagnosis, stigma reduction, and adequate treatment options. Neuroscientific models of perception suggest that functional symptoms arise due to dysregulated sensorimotor processing in the central nervous system, with brain-based predictions dominating the eventual percept. Experimental evidence for this transdiagnostic mechanism has been established in various functional symptoms. The goal of the current study was to investigate whether erroneous sensorimotor processing is an underlying transdiagnostic mechanism in chronic (functional) pain. Method: A total of 13 patients with chronic (functional) pain [three patients with chronic (functional) pain disorder, F45.40, ICD-10; 10 patients with chronic pain disorder with somatic and psychological factors, F45.41, ICD-10]; and 15 healthy controls performed large combined eye-head gaze shifts toward visual targets, naturally and with increased head moment of inertia. We simultaneously measured participants' eye and head movements to assess head oscillations at the end of the gaze shift, which are an established indicator of (transdiagnostic) sensorimotor processing deficits of head control. Results: Using a Bayesian analysis protocol, we found that patients with chronic (functional) pain and control participants stabilized their heads equally well (Bayes Factor 01 = 3.7, Bayes Factor exclusion = 5.23; corresponding to substantial evidence) during all sessions of the experiment. Conclusion: Our results suggest that patients with chronic (functional) pain do not show measurable symptom-unspecific sensorimotor processing deficits. We discuss outcome parameter choice, organ system specificity, and selection of patient diagnoses as possible reasons for this result and recommend future avenues for research.

Conflicto de intereses editoriales / Conflict of interest publishers

Un conflicto de interés (CDI) existe cuando el juicio de un investigador sobre un tema determinado y la integridad de su acción están indebidamente influenciados por uninterés secundario de tipo profesional, económico o personal en competencia, afecten o no a dicho juicio. Las revistas de medicina deben velar por la confianza de su público en el proceso de revisión y por la credibilidad de los artículos publicados escrutando laexistencia de CDIs durante la escritura, la revisión y la decisión de publicar artículos. Cualquiera de las personas involucradas puede tener relaciones financieras directas o indirectas o CDIs no económicos, que pueden mitigarse por su evaluación o verificación por terceros. Las revistas deben aclarar cuáles CDIs deben declararse, cuándo prescriben y los cursos de acción ante la falta de declaración; definir las causales de rechazo de la publicación del trabajo y publicar con al artículo las declaraciones de CDIs relevantes.Las guías de práctica clínica de sociedades científicas son elaboradas por especialistas reconocidos. Estas sociedades perciben la necesidad de evitar que aquellas contengan CDIs para temas sensibles como recomendar tratamientos; esto genera dificultadesa la hora de escribir estas guidelines, ya que los más capacitados suelen tener CDIs financieros que pueden llegar a proscribirlos para la autoría. La RAMR pide a autores y revisores expresen sus CDIs, pero esta declaración es habitualmente nula. Para revertir la no-declaración sistemática de CDIs, hemos elaborado un cuestionario breve que ayudará a conocer y manejar mejor los CDIs.

Conflict of interest (COI) exists when judgment regarding some specific issue and integrity of its act are unduly influenced by a secondary competing interest, professional, economic or personal, even if they do not affect such judgment. Medical journals must take care for the reader’s trust regarding the review process and for the credibility of articles by investigating about COIs while writing, reviewing or deciding about the publication of an article. Authors, reviewers and editors could have direct or indirect financial or othercompeting interests. COIs are ubiquitous and cannot be eliminated altogether. However, they can be managed constructively. Journals need to be specific about their definition of COI, including its standards on expiry, the steps that editors will take if competinginterests surface from other sources, and the reasons for not to consider a manuscript any further. They need also to publish the disclosure of relevant COIs. Clinical practice guidelines published by scientific societies are written by opinion leaders. Those professional societies perceive it is necessary to avoid COIs for delicateissues as recommending therapies, and this generates difficulties in the guidelines’ writing, as the experts have usually financial COIs and this leads to exclusion of such leaders from authorship. The Revista Americana de Medicina Respiratoria asks authors and reviewers to disclose their COIs, but they never do it completely. Consequently, the editors decided, when trying to revert this universal trend to no-declaration, to create a brief questionnaire designed to define and manage more precisely the COIs.